It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
Star Wars™: X-Wing and TIE Fighter seriesXWVM - Any interest?(1274 posts)(1274 posts)
(1274 posts)
Pages:
1
10
14
15
16
17
18
30
40
50
60
70
80
85
This is my favourite topic
Posted June 29, 2015
avatar
scotsdezmond: I don't know about the low level operation of the game beyond what I can infer as a casual player, but I did a quick bit of experimentation if it helps:-

-Speed
In X-Wing 1993, using an X-Wing starting from a fully stopped state (speed 0), going to full throttle (speed 100) in a balanced power configuration (maintenance level for shields and lasers) takes 20 seconds, i.e. a measured acceleration of 5 m/s.
Any experimental data is of huge use for me. Mainly because I can barely squish any time in my schedule to work on the code, so if all the testing in the real game is done by someone else, it's time I can spend actually coding. :)

I'm not sure if the power balance affects or should affect the pitch and roll ratings. I know in XvT and XWA the Throttle % did, but it didn't back in X-Wing and in TIE Fighter.
Even when that added a little bit more depth to the dogfight gameplay, I won't add that to XWVM, because I think it detracted from the overall personality of every ship if a Y-Wing could turn in a dime and face a much nimbler Interceptor.

avatar
scotsdezmond: -Pitch
Again, in X-Wing 1993, an X-Wing at speed 0, pitching directly up using the keyboard, takes approx 8 seconds to pitch 360 degrees, i.e. perform a full vertical loop in a static position.
In the same Speed 0 state, using the keyboard to steer right does seem to do a mix of yaw and roll, resulting in an arc that forms a rough circle if the origin position is 12 o'clock. However, I say rough circle because using input that is only the right key, the original position is not returned at 12 o'clock, but is instead a few degrees higher (i.e. origin y + ~5 degrees). I would speculate that this is due to inaccuracies / rounding errors in the original flight engine.
I never realized that you could do a full arc just moving right or left. We should be able to guess the radius of that arc by looking at the recording room. Or maybe experimenting with different proportions of yaw and roll.
If the deviation respect to the 12 o'clock is of only 5 degrees, I agree with your assumption that it can be a precision artifact of the old 16-bit game.

avatar
scotsdezmond: I also found two documents online which may be of some use, both of which are vintage x-wing editing documents that contain observations about some of these features.

X-wing Ship Editor Readme - http://www.rebelsquadrons.org/xwing/files/xwse30.txt
X-wing Ship Designer's Guide - http://www.renegadewing.com/assets/zips/XWMDG.PDF (see page 34 and also Appendix A)

Hopefully this is of some help!
Yes, your findings are a lot of help. Thanks you!

However, I knew those documents already, and they are quite useful, but still don't give explanations to the Power, roll and what units those stats use. I mean, I know that MGLT roughly equals m/s. And RU and SBD are equivalent, aboutish, only differing if it is hull hitpoints or shield hitpoints.
However, there is no explanation why the capital ships have RU and SBD ratings just above those of the smaller fighters, while they are much sturdier ingame.
Or what are the roll and pitch units? Degrees per second? Radians per second? Some other subdivision?

Also, the BFlight.Ovl clearly lists shield ratings for the fore and the aft sections of every ship. The value listed in those documents is the sum of both ratings.
But does the AI use fore and aft shields? Or they have a combined shield sum of both? Intuitively we could guess that they just keep both sections balanced, or they treat the shield value as a combined amount, specially once we got to see the remaining shield percentage in TIE Fighter (in X-Wing it was just "Ok", "Shields Down" and "Hull damaged").

If I may keep asking, are AI ships immune to AI fire? I mean, can a TIE Fighter fire thru another friendly TIE Fighter? I believe I have seen that happening. I also have seen that happening with rebel fighters flying in formation. However, I seem to be hit by my wingmen shots. Any of you have gathere some evidence of this?
Posted June 30, 2015
avatar
Azrapse: If I may keep asking, are AI ships immune to AI fire? I mean, can a TIE Fighter fire thru another friendly TIE Fighter? I believe I have seen that happening. I also have seen that happening with rebel fighters flying in formation. However, I seem to be hit by my wingmen shots. Any of you have gathere some evidence of this?
I've seen fighters destroyed by friendly fire from other fighters in the demo release of "Star Wars: TIE Fighter".
(http://www.swgamer.com/demo_tie.shtml)
Post edited June 30, 2015 by FekLeyrTarg
Posted July 01, 2015
Hey there!
Then, I'll organize the data to readeble form and post it.

I only disagree the concepts. If you wanna make an X-Wing game I suggest make it hardore! Like the original one. No screen info on shield ratings, no failed mission message, no warning boxes over the crosshair, no easy destroy of warheads, no "match speed" <ENTER>, no new key combinations at all! :-) Just plain old do-it-and-you-see-it.

I agree to skip the 33% throttle -> fast turn. Of course I liked it in XWA, but its another game. ;)

Did you know, that it is possible to destroy warheads in X-Wing '93? It is very hard, only if it travels right into your face. But it is possible!
And did you know it is possible to destroy a Corvette's turret? Of course, the hits does not decrease the shield/hull of it! I guess you can do this on a Star Destroyer as well, never tested.
Posted July 01, 2015
avatar
Sekir_Delyn: Hey there!
Then, I'll organize the data to readeble form and post it.

I only disagree the concepts. If you wanna make an X-Wing game I suggest make it hardore! Like the original one. No screen info on shield ratings, no failed mission message, no warning boxes over the crosshair, no easy destroy of warheads, no "match speed" <ENTER>, no new key combinations at all! :-) Just plain old do-it-and-you-see-it.

I agree to skip the 33% throttle -> fast turn. Of course I liked it in XWA, but its another game. ;)

Did you know, that it is possible to destroy warheads in X-Wing '93? It is very hard, only if it travels right into your face. But it is possible!
And did you know it is possible to destroy a Corvette's turret? Of course, the hits does not decrease the shield/hull of it! I guess you can do this on a Star Destroyer as well, never tested.
I have been able to shoot down missile shot at me. Just face them, keep shooting and they eventually explode. You don't really need to even aim at them. Their hitbox must be really big as seen from the front.
That we cannot shoot them down from the sides, unlike in TIE Fighter and on, must have to do with either a bug or that their hitbox is incredibly thin from the sides.
I always felt a little bit like cheating that you could shoot down enemy missiles so easily in TIE Fighter. But I guess it adds more gameplay value than just do evasive maneuvers until they pop.

I didn't know you could destroy individual components in X-Wing. I can't even remember ever seeing turrets on Star Destroyers. The lasers just appeared from fixed points.

I get your point on a hardcore version. However convenience doesn't equal easy mode.
I mean, for example, the Enter key to match speed doesn't make the game easier. You can obtain the same effect by increasing your laser and shield recharge levels, or by manually lowering your throttle to 33% or 66% and then fine tuning with the + and - num keys.
In the first case, powerbalancing is the cleverest way to slowdown. Not only you get closer to your target's speed, but your are using the surplus energy to refill your lasers or shields.
In the second case, you are just wasting both time and energy. The Match Speed command is a shortcut to this second case. You waste your energy, but save time by getting the throttle to the right level automatically. I think better pilots will still use the power balance method, while rookies would use the Match Speed method.

In any case, I would be totally in for having some toggles for the player, in case they want the original computer screens with just "Ok", "Shld Dwn", "Hull Dmg", and "Disabled" statuses, or if instead they want the stats view that became standard from TIE Fighter and on.
Posted July 01, 2015
avatar
Azrapse: I can absolutely use them if you will share them.
I know overcharged lasers deal 5 damage and travel 1500m, while undercharged lasers probably deal and travel half those amounts. Also, I estimated laser speed at around 600m/s, but I might be remembering wrong, or remembering the speed of lasers in TIE Fighter or XvT, where they are faster.
I don't have numbers for ions. They travel slower and father away, that's everything I know.
Which fields you mentioned you disagree with?
Okay, here's the thing!

- everything you fire has a "range" of time, not distance. It is affected by speed: so a torpedo with 60 sec life will get waaay farther with speed of 100 then speed of 0. Note: it is possible to hit a target from ranges over 12 km!
- lifetime for warheads are exact. Laser and Ion lifetimes are pretty close measurements, actual values unknown.
- therefor it is usually true to travel speed as well. Very close measurements, not in-game data reverse-engineered.
- ranges at different speeds are for your convinince only, not to base anything on them!
- damage is not dependent on distance, but speed affects it. The formula is linear.
- damage values are exact!

Assume my observations right, the last column of formula is based on speed as well, so if speeds are incorrect, then formula needs a little tweaking as well. I was very precise on taking the measurements. Is you use these data nobody will notice any difference from the original.

Of course, there are in-game rounding errors, I will not mention them for now (like torpedo range. it should be only 6.6km)

Range at speed [km] Damage at speed
Weapon Speed [m/s] Range [s] 0 100 0 100 Damage formula
Charged laser 500 2.7 1.33 1.62 5 7.25 dmg=0.0225*delta v - 6.25
Low laser 500 2.7 1.33 1.62 2.5 4.75 dmg=0.0225*delta v - 8.75
Charged ion 185 2.5 0.46 0.71 4 6.25 dmg=0.0225*delta v - 0.1625
Low ion 185 2.5 0.46 0.71 2 4.25 dmg=0.0225*delta v - 2.1625
Missile 220 30 6.69 9.6 30 32.25 dmg=0.0225*delta v + 25.05
Torpedo 110 60 6.653 12.6 100 102.25 dmg=0.0225*delta v + 97.525
Posted July 01, 2015
avatar
Azrapse: I didn't know you could destroy individual components in X-Wing. I can't even remember ever seeing turrets on Star Destroyers. The lasers just appeared from fixed points.
The only destroyable components in X-Wing are the Corvette's turrets and the Star Destroyer's shield generators.

avatar
Azrapse: In any case, I would be totally in for having some toggles for the player, in case they want the original computer screens with just "Ok", "Shld Dwn", "Hull Dmg", and "Disabled" statuses, or if instead they want the stats view that became standard from TIE Fighter and on.
Good idea.
Posted July 01, 2015
Well, I tried to make it look good. :-)

Regarding shield and hull rating of ships:
As you figured out small crafts has a divider of 100. Like: X-wing has a 2100 hull, which will be 21 damage resistance.
Bigger ships (CON, FRT, CRV) has 25.
Capital ships (FRG, CRS, STD) has 6.25.

Example: FRG has a shield value of 8000+8000=16000. Divide it by 6.25 you get 2560. Which mean 2560/5=512 laser hits would get her shields down. Now, in-game rounding error kicks in and makes it to 517 shots. :-) But these are synthetic situation, not "real-life" scenarios. The player will never realize these errors while trying to fight his way through.

Back to weapons: I still don't know how the Ion cannons are working. The damage data I provided is against shields only, I have no idea how it affects the systems! Like: two hits makes a T/F, T/I, T/B disabled (but not displaying it!) the third hit disables it by label and destroys it as well. Other crafts will bear a lot (maybe infinite?) shots of ion blasts without a problem.
Attachments:
weapons-summary.png (22 Kb)
Posted July 01, 2015
avatar
Azrapse: I have been able to shoot down missile shot at me. Just face them, keep shooting and they eventually explode. You don't really need to even aim at them. Their hitbox must be really big as seen from the front.

I get your point on a hardcore version. However convenience doesn't equal easy mode.
I mean, for example, the Enter key to match speed doesn't make the game easier. You can obtain the same effect by increasing your laser and shield recharge levels, or by manually lowering your throttle to 33% or 66% and then fine tuning with the + and - num keys.
In the first case, powerbalancing is the cleverest way to slowdown. Not only you get closer to your target's speed, but your are using the surplus energy to refill your lasers or shields.
In the second case, you are just wasting both time and energy. The Match Speed command is a shortcut to this second case. You waste your energy, but save time by getting the throttle to the right level automatically. I think better pilots will still use the power balance method, while rookies would use the Match Speed method.

In any case, I would be totally in for having some toggles for the player, in case they want the original computer screens with just "Ok", "Shld Dwn", "Hull Dmg", and "Disabled" statuses, or if instead they want the stats view that became standard from TIE Fighter and on.
Interesting! I'll try to shoot down missiles and check for the results!
Meaning using the ELS for slow down is what I usually do. Very tricky when you have to deal with Advenced TIEs and GUNs at the same time. ;-) And you are probably right: rookies using the match speed option.
YES! Hardcore game option will be very good! That was in my mind as well.

I posted a pic showing weapon infos.
Posted July 01, 2015
Okay, that information is worth gold for me right now. Thank you so much.
It this all from experimentation, or you have some other sources?

In respect to ions, I am not sure if different ships have different "system ratings", in the sense that you need more ion blasts to reduce their system to 0%.
I think it is also true that you don't usually need to fully disable any starfighter for it to stop doing anything, not only TIEs.
I have always found it weird that a full star destroyer takes almost as few ion blast to disable than a corvette or a frigate. If it takes more, it is barely noticeable.

The point of the hull rating being measured in RU (as Relative Units) make much more sense now that you mention that different starship scales use different dividers for the hull and shield value in BFlight.OVL.
RU and SBD ratings are relative to the scale! So we have 3 scales and the multiplier used to get their ratings:
Fighter: *1/100
Freighter: *4/100
Capital: *16/100

(It's funny that corvettes are considered freighters ingame, regarding mission editors. It totally fits this)

It is also very interesting that you found out that all attacks in game deal extra damage based on the speed of the shooting craft, not only ordnance, but also energy weapons!
So, by looking at your table. Any attack will deal damage D following this expression:
W = weapon base damage
V = shooting ship's current speed
D = W + 2.25 *(V/100)

That 2.25 number appears elsewhere. All ships speeds in BFlight.OVL are given multiplied by 2.25, compared to their max balanced speed in MGLT. (Balanced, meaning neutral ELS power balance).
Balanced Speed in MGLT = Speed Rating / 2.25

So if we stop thinking at speeds as measured in MGLT, but instead we keep the original speed rating, in whatever units it is measured. We get that
D = W + V/100
if I am not mistaken.

Out of curiosity, we know that 1 MGLT = 1 m/s.
The speed ratings are measured in something so that a meter is 2.25 times bigger than it, per second.
Is there a known measure unit like it in the Imperial system (I am only versed on the Metric system, so I don't know).
I am using http://www.unit-conversion.info/speed.html and it seems that the closest thing I can find is that
1 MGLT = 2.24 mph (miles per hour)
So it seems that the different speeds are measured internally in miles per hour, that is used the damage formula for added damage depending on speed.

What do you think?
Post edited July 01, 2015 by Azrapse
Posted July 01, 2015
avatar
Azrapse: Okay, that information is worth gold for me right now. Thank you so much.
It this all from experimentation, or you have some other sources?


So it seems that the different speeds are measured internally in miles per hour, that is used the damage formula for added damage depending on speed.

What do you think?
I started with experimenting, counting laser hits, etc. Then the rounding errors came in, which made my head ache like hell. Then, I figured out it is easier to modify the target to get accurate results. I used XW SE 5.0 to modify the A-wing's hull ratings, and X-ED to modify missions for my suit. Then I shot a single blast at a certain speed setting and expecting the result as you see in my table.

According to the damage-speed idea: WOW! It is quite possible it is in mph! Just makes sense! the difference between our examined 2.25 and the mph-m/s conversion's 2.237 is really low! I'll experiment with it a bit. :-)
Posted July 01, 2015
avatar
Sekir_Delyn: According to the damage-speed idea: WOW! It is quite possible it is in mph! Just makes sense! the difference between our examined 2.25 and the mph-m/s conversion's 2.237 is really low! I'll experiment with it a bit. :-)
Considering that X-Wing is a 16bit game and that they didn't have so much precision or so much processing time to spare to do spurious divisions, etc, and that they need to transform from mph to MGLT every frame (for the instrument panels, etc), I guess that they chose 2.25 because its inverse is 0.44444...
Instead of dividing by 2.25 every frame, that is costly at a computational level, they multiplied by 0.4444... that is the same result but much easier and faster to do for a 16bit processor without mathcoprocessor (Remember that X-Wing was meant to be run on a 386 without coprocessor!) They probably used fixed point arithmetic, that would explain for the loss of precission here and there, and for the really wacky movement of the AI at low speeds (for example, the tugs) in this game.

Also, I remember from the interviews at the end in the Russel DeMaria strategy guides, that the devs attempted to complete the whole game in under 2 years, and they leveraged what they had learned from their previous projects, in particular Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe. If they reused part of the code from that flightsim, and of course, they used miles per hour for those WWII planes, it feels natural that X-Wing internally inherited that representation for the speed of the fighters, even when visually it translated to MGLT.
Posted July 01, 2015
Okay, I just recorded a video: X-wing is two frames slower than 100 m/s. Not a big deal. But meaning slower results in a 222.49 mph speed. If only it xould be two frames faster would mean 225 mph. :-S Could be rounding errors though!
I suggest just to stick to the m/s.

Your idea on a reworked formula is pretty neat. I like that! I still have to check something else:
Your formula suggest that damage based only on player's craft speed. My formula suggests a speed difference between the player's craft and the target. I have to experiment with this! I'll let you know the results.

avatar
Sekir_Delyn: According to the damage-speed idea: WOW! It is quite possible it is in mph! Just makes sense! the difference between our examined 2.25 and the mph-m/s conversion's 2.237 is really low! I'll experiment with it a bit. :-)
avatar
Azrapse: Considering that X-Wing is a 16bit game and that they didn't have so much precision or so much processing time to spare to do spurious divisions, etc, and that they need to transform from mph to MGLT every frame (for the instrument panels, etc), I guess that they chose 2.25 because its inverse is 0.44444...
Instead of dividing by 2.25 every frame, that is costly at a computational level, they multiplied by 0.4444... that is the same result but much easier and faster to do for a 16bit processor without mathcoprocessor (Remember that X-Wing was meant to be run on a 386 without coprocessor!) They probably used fixed point arithmetic, that would explain for the loss of precission here and there, and for the really wacky movement of the AI at low speeds (for example, the tugs) in this game.

Also, I remember from the interviews at the end in the Russel DeMaria strategy guides, that the devs attempted to complete the whole game in under 2 years, and they leveraged what they had learned from their previous projects, in particular Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe. If they reused part of the code from that flightsim, and of course, they used miles per hour for those WWII planes, it feels natural that X-Wing internally inherited that representation for the speed of the fighters, even when visually it translated to MGLT.
Nice reasoning I like that!
Fortunately, the player wouldn't notice these little nouances, just us, crazy data experimenters. ;-)

Crap, I miscounted the frames. The craft is even slower... :-(
Post edited July 01, 2015 by Sekir_Delyn
Posted July 01, 2015
Well, your findings about the laser range suggest to me that both ordnance and energy weapons projectile speed is relative to the shooting craft.
That means, that lasers move at 500 m/s, plus the speed of the ship that shot them.
So an X-Wing moving at 100 MGLT shoots a laser. For the X-Wing pilot, the laser moves at 500 MGLT away from him, but for an external observer, the laser moves at 600 m/s.

If I remember correctly, in TIE Fighter, the mission officer used to recommend that proton rockets and space bombs were launched while at high speeds, because then they would reach their target faster. So that meant that ordnance speed is relative to the craft that launches it.
And I wouldn't be surprised that for simplicity in the code, energy weapons behave the same.

So, a torpedo shot by an X-Wing at 0 MGLT should deal 100 damage, following your table.
The same X-Wing moving at 100 MGLT would deal 102.25
An A-Wing that somehow shoots a torpedo, and moves at 180 MGLT should deal 104.05 damage with that torpedo.

I still have a doubt, though.
In that formula
D=W+2.25V/100
still that 100 that could maybe not be an arbitrary constant, but actually the max balanced speed of the X-Wing!
I wonder if, for an A-Wing, the formula would be D=W+2.25V/120
For an Y-Wing it would be D=W+2.25V/80
and for a B-Wing it would be D=W+2.25V/91.111111

In general, D=W+V*2.25/B
where B is the max balanced speed of the shooting craft.
Post edited July 01, 2015 by Azrapse
Posted July 01, 2015
avatar
Azrapse: Well, your findings about the laser range suggest to me that both ordnance and energy weapons projectile speed is relative to the shooting craft.
That means, that lasers move at 500 m/s, plus the speed of the ship that shot them.
So an X-Wing moving at 100 MGLT shoots a laser. For the X-Wing pilot, the laser moves at 500 MGLT away from him, but for an external observer, the laser moves at 600 m/s.

If I remember correctly, in TIE Fighter, the mission officer used to recommend that proton rockets and space bombs were launched while at high speeds, because then they would reach their target faster. So that meant that ordnance speed is relative to the craft that launches it.
And I wouldn't be surprised that for simplicity in the code, energy weapons behave the same.

So, a torpedo shot by an X-Wing at 0 MGLT should deal 100 damage, following your table.
The same X-Wing moving at 100 MGLT would deal 102.25
An A-Wing that somehow shoots a torpedo, and moves at 180 MGLT should deal 104.05 damage with that torpedo.

I still have a doubt, though.
In that formula
D=W+2.25V/100
still that 100 that could maybe not be an arbitrary constant, but actually the max balanced speed of the X-Wing!
I wonder if, for an A-Wing, the formula would be D=W+2.25V/120
For an Y-Wing it would be D=W+2.25V/80
and for a B-Wing it would be D=W+2.25V/91.111111

In general, D=W+V*2.25/B
where B is the max balanced speed of the shooting craft.
Yes, yes, everything you fire has a cumulative speed.

I'm pretty sure, that 100 divider is a constant. Remember: we came from a constant divider of 100 for craft shd/hull ratings! But I may double check it if you wish.

Okay, I checked, my formula stands.

edit 2.:
Another check. Laser damage is depending only player's craft's speed! Now, your formula stands!

Doesn't matter if the target matching your speed.
Scenario: a-wing pursuing a-wing, speed is 90.
Thus Delta v is 0. I supposed this give you a damage of 5 because laser's impact speed is still 500 m/s like shooting in stopped position. But nooooo! Speed 90 according to formula gives a 7.025 damage and it stands perfectly!

Correct formula of yours: D=W+0.0225V
Post edited July 01, 2015 by Sekir_Delyn
Posted July 01, 2015
Nice work!
I wouldn't have known where to even start to make those experiments!
Did you give an A-Wing an exact amount of hitpoints so that it would pop after exactly a particular amount of shots? Where were you seeing the exact amount of damage dealt?
Pages:
1
10
14
15
16
17
18
30
40
50
60
70
80
85
This is my favourite topic
Community
Star Wars™: X-Wing and TIE Fighter seriesXWVM - Any interest?(1274 posts)(1274 posts)
(1274 posts)